VerifyNoOtherCalls: fix bugs with multi-dot expressions
#544
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Using recursive (multi-dot) `Verify` expressions can result in the
implicit creation of "inner mocks" (and, depending on whether `Verify`
receives an expression tree or an action delegate) invocations to
get at the sub-objects:
mock.Verify(m => m.A.B.C.X);
mock.VerifyNoOtherCalls();
One would probably expect that invocations for `m.A`, `m.A.B`, and
`m.A.B.C` were implicitly verified in the first `Verify` call.
The tests added in this commit show that this doesn't work yet.
(Also, `VerifyNoOtherCalls` does not perform recursive verification,
but just like `Verify` and `VerifyAll`, perhaps it should?)
stakx
force-pushed
the
verify-no-other-calls
branch
from
6cac284
to
91b3095
Compare
Like `Verify` and `VerifyAll`, `VerifyNoOtherCalls` should really perform recursive verification; that is, it should include invocations on any automatically mocked sub-objects created through multi-dot expressions. The test added here shows that this doesn't work yet.
The current implementation of `VerifyNoOtherCalls` has one short-
coming, which is that if a method is invoked in both a "transitive"
manner but also non-transitively, then the latter cannot be recognized
as such. For example:
var mock = new Mock<IFoo> { DefaultValue = DefaultValue.Mock };
mock.Object.A().B();
mock.Object.A();
mock.Verify(m => m.A().B());
mock.VerifyNoOtherCalls();
With the above, `VerifyNoOtherCalls` won't currently be able to recog-
nise the second, "non-transitive" call to `.A()` as one that needs to
be explicitly verified. No verification exception will be thrown.
Add tests that document both this problem, and a possible way of fix-
ing it.
stakx
force-pushed
the
verify-no-other-calls
branch
from
91b3095
to
f3373b2
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR ensures that
VerifyNoOtherCallsgets along more or less nicely with multi-dot ("recursive") verification expressions.Recursive expressions are generally a pain point in Moq, and the way they are implemented lead to all sorts of trouble. Quite a few of the currently remaining bug reports are directly related to that particular aspect of Moq. I'm expecting that despite the improvements in this PR, people might sooner or later discover that
VerifyNoOtherCallsacts a little weird in circumstances where multi-dot expressions and automatically mocked sub-objects are involved.(Fixing these multi-dot expression troubles is semi-planned for Moq 4.9 or 4.10.)
This solves the second of two issues with the initial
VerifyNoOtherCallsimplementation, as tracked in #527 (comment).